Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Five things to know about the promising, perplexing Indiana Pacers in 2016-17

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Five things to know about the promising, perplexing Indiana Pacers in 2016-17

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/fi...rs-in-2016-17/

    Here's the best way to look at what the Indiana Pacers did this summer, from the moment they finished their first-round series vs. the Raptors ...
    Indiana made a series of perplexing and seemingly contradictory moves that didn't make much sense, but the moves (outside of firing Frank Vogel) were all independently good and likely made them a better team.
    Most teams would have taken a first-round appearance in which you took it to the 2-seed for seven games as a massive success in what was really a rebuilding year, but Larry Bird had different expectations. In the span of three months, Bird and company:
    Did not renew Vogel's contract
    Replaced him with Nate McMillan
    Traded George Hill for Jeff Teague
    Traded for Thad Young
    Signed Al Jefferson
    Let Ian Mahinmi, Jordan Hill, and Solomon Hill depart in free agency
    That's a sizable amount of turnover for a playoff team two years removed from an Eastern Conference Finals appearance. Whatever it is that has crawled under Bird's skin about this team must be highly irritating to provoke that kind of overhaul. That's where the strangeness comes in. Vogel was a good-to-great coach who prompted a top-ten defense from his team no matter the personnel, and helped develop talent from George to Roy Hibbert to Myles Turner. Solomon Hill was a versatile wing and very solid defender coming into his own. Hill had been the starting point guard for the squad, an efficient shooter and effective leader, for four years.
    So the moves are confusing. Good players are not there, a good coach is gone, continuity has been disrupted for the second time in two years.
    And yet, Teague is an offensive upgrade on Hill by any measure (averaging nearly twice as many assists per 100 possessions last season). Al Jefferson gives them a quality veteran scorer off the bench who can start in a pinch. Thad Young provides incredible versatility and production at the four spot. They are, more than ever, primed to build around Paul George. The moves were, independently, good.
    The Pacers did things which do not make sense in regards to building a good team, but may have wound up with a better team. This is what makes them so fascinating.

    Here are five things to know about the Pacers headed into next season.
    1. The combination of Nate McMillan, the Pacers, and Larry Bird is tapestry of weirdness
    Larry Bird has been unhappy with the offense for years; it's at least partially responsible for Frank Vogel having taken his services to the Mouse's House in Florida. Bird has openly campaigned for a move to a faster offense, and using Paul George at stretch four. George objected to the move, complained at every turn about being uncomfortable in it, and eventually, quietly in the first half of the season, the Pacers scrapped that plan.
    Between 2008 and 2011, the Blazers under Nate McMillan finished 30th in pace (possessions per game, a standard stat used to describe the pace of play) three out of four seasons. In the other season they finished 29th. The entire offensive model of Portland under McMillan was "slow and efficient." The offense was great. It was just slow.
    When Bird has talked about the offense, he doesn't talk about improving the efficiency, which actually tells you how good the offense is. He talks raw numbers, points per game. If your offense improves and you play more efficiently, but you play slow, you're still going to produce a low per game figure.
    McMillan hasn't really answered the question about pace of play, other than saying the team "wants to play up tempo and faster." You might think that should be enough, but nearly every coach who comes into a situation with an expectation, no matter what it is, says that the plan to do that. You're going to hear Mike D'Antoni talk about offense at media day and how it's a priority for him. You're going to hear Tom Thibodeau talk about offense. But coaches have reputations for a reason, and McMillan's reputation is to play not just slow, but glacially slow.
    Additionally, the Pacers didn't make moves this summer to play faster. Jeff Teague isn't a roadrunner, he's a moderate pace point guard. Thad Young seems like the incumbent power forward, which means Paul George won't be taking that role, and even if they both play combo forward, that's not a perfect fit because part of the benefit of moving George to the four is to free up another shooter. Myles Turner is a pretty standard center, and free agent addition Al Jefferson isn't exactly a gazelle, bounding down the hardwood.
    Maybe Bird has backed off his demands for offensive revolution. Maybe McMillan can just build an entirely new ethos, or the past four years he's spent as an assistant have shaped his views and approach. Maybe there's a different approach with the roster of veterans than what their profiles have indicated.
    But we definitely don't know what to expect the Pacers to look like next season.

    2. Paul George is set to tilt the headline axis

    One thing we do know about McMillan, however, is that he tends to shape his offense to his personnel. When Brandon Roy was in his prime, you saw huge jumps in isolation possession figures via Synergy Sports with the Blazers. When Roy was injured and the Blazers were absent a consistent No.1 option, there was more of an even distribution of sets. When LaMarcus Aldridge emerged as the team's best player, the post took a big jump.

    In other words, there's a strong likelihood that George takes on a bigger role this season, in terms of isolation usage.
    Here's a number. Paul George only spent 15.1 percent of his possessions (including passes out of ISO) in isolation sets last year, via Synergy Sports. That's still a high figure, good for 22nd most in the league, but LeBron James was 10th. Kevin Durant, who was splitting responsibilities with Russell Westbrook, was equal to George in ISO possessions.
    George was 10th in overall usage last season, but he could very well rise to the top five this year. The question will be how he adjusts and what he'll do with the amount of freedom he'll be afforded. Last year he started off blisteringly hot and was a trendy early MVP candidate, but failed to register an effective field goal percentage over 50 percent the back half of the season (shooting less than 45 percent from the field).
    George put on a stellar playoff performance and is coming into his own as an NBA superstar, which makes it all the more imperative for the Pacers to build a contender around him. They'll enable him in the most basic ways this season, likely trusting him with the ball more than ever.
    It should be noted that George playing off-ball is a serious weapon. His numbers on off-screen and hand-off sets are stellar in terms of production and efficiency. George is so long that he slays when given quick catch-and-rise situations.

    It's possible Monta Ellis or Jeff Teague takes on more of a creator role, but it's safe to assume that George will be the focal point of the offense, given McMillan's seeming preference for the fastest way to get from points A-to-B in terms of offense. Don't be surprised if George has a monster season.What's more, George is the kind of player the sports world wants to embrace. He's a good quote without being bombastic, confident without being acerbic, has an aesthetically pleasing game and a great story with how he came back from his terrible leg injury to lead Team USA to gold this summer to boot. MVP conversations are almost always tilted more by the kinds of players the environment wants to support rather than the actual candidate's play. This is the kind of thing that could tilt him over, say, the nearly mute Kawhi Leonard.

    3. Monta Ellis' season is only going to go one of two ways

    Under Nate McMillan, Monta Ellis may be more free to attack for quick opportunities. USATSI
    Ellis should have thrived more than anyone in the Pacers' attempt at a fast-pace system, but instead, he stumbled big time. He endured his lowest points per game and per 100 possessions mark since his rookie season, and he shot, and a 30.9 percentage mark from the arc, which is just below his career average.
    (Not going to lie, if you'd asked me before research what Ellis' career 3-point mar was, I would have given you 34 to 35 percent. He's a Don Nelson firebug guard known for making tough shots; I would never have guessed he's shot over 31 percent from deep just once in the past five seasons.)
    However, with McMillan, Ellis may be more free to attack for quick opportunities and find shooters. Think of him in this kind of role:

    Making quick attacks, probing the defense, quick passes. There's a lot to like about the idea of Ellis in that role. Ellis had a low rate of possession per touch last season, and didn't really dribble the life out of the ball, either.
    But if Teague takes most of that role, or if CJ Miles, who is a better shooter and defender, thrives, Ellis could be on the way out. Ellis' defensive metrics all graded out as fine, but he's never going to be known for his defense, which McMillan has made a point of emphasis. Ellis might absolutely thrive under McMillan, he and Roy share a lot of similarities, way more than George does. But Ellis has bounced from team to team since being traded from Golden State, and turns 31 before the season begins.
    It's going to be a very good or very rough year for Monta Ellis.

    4. Speaking of the defense ... they're trying to fix something that isn't broken
    Here's a weird thing, or rather, two weird things.

    1. McMillan is spoken of as a defensive specialist, when his Blazers teams were never very good defensively. This is where the pace element comes into play. Here are the points per game and per 100 possessions ranks for the Blazers' defense between 2008 and 2011.
    YEAR RANK, POINTS ALLOWED PER GAME RANK, POINTS ALLOWED PER 100 POSSESSIONS
    2008 8th (96.3) 108.4 (17th)
    2009 4th (94.1) 13th (107.8)
    2010 3rd (94.8) 15th (107.1)
    2011 7th (94.8) 14th (107.1)

    Edge of Nowhere blends adventure gameplay with elements of horror where nothing is what it seems. Now...
    Again, if you play slow, you're going to score fewer points and give up fewer points, and if you play fast you're going to score more points and give up more points. It has very little to do with how well you actually score or defend. McMillan's teams are never great on that end of the floor, but he was a big part of the Pacers' defense which has been phenomenal the past few years.

    2. McMillan is talking up defensive improvement as a key point. He told reporters this summer that the team was "much better two years ago" defensively, and he's right. Two years ago, the Pacers went to the Eastern Conference Finals largely on the back of their 1st-ranked defense. But in 2016, they were still third overall. Defense was never a problem under Vogel.
    Now, that's a results-based analysis. McMillan likely knows key areas where the defense wasn't as good as it could have been last year and there were real concerns about their consistency game to game.
    It's just odd that defense, which the Pacers have been elite at for five years, is such a focus area given how good they've been on that end of the floor.
    There's also the concern of trying to fix too many things at once. Basically, Indiana wants to run more, score more points, and play top-end elite defense. The only team to really accomplish that was the 2015 Warriors, who obviously won the title with the fastest pace and defensive efficiency. Pretty good model, that. But it seems like a real challenge for this team and where it's at.

    5. Myles Turner: Olympus wasn't conquered in a day

    The Pacers are going to count on Myles Turner to protect the paint this season.
    The Pacers are clearly banking on Turner as their big man of the future with their decision to let Ian Mahinmi walk in free agency. Turner showed the whole gamut of promise last season, with a deft jumper (shot 41 percent as a rookie on jumpers), great size and athleticism, impressive skills with the ball and defensively. He's explosive with great touch, and able to contain perimeter players on switches up top.
    But by making him their primary big man, the Pacers are putting some pressure on him. He needs to improve in finishing at the rim after he scored just 33 points on 44 attempts rolling to the basket last season, and has to manage a lot of the standard rookie improvements in things like awareness with pick and pops and improving strength to handle opponents in the post or on rolls.
    His rim protection numbers last year were good, for a rookie, but with Mahinmi gone and Jefferson's lack of hops, Turner will have to carry the load as far as protecting the paint. Turner's a big part of the Pacers' future, but still needs to be eased in, instead of being thrust wildly into a bigger role. If he thrives, the Pacers will, too. If he doesn't, they have other ways to get the job done, it just becomes more difficult.
    Some good information, one thing I liked was how they said McMillian tailored his offensive strategy towards his personnel. (something a certain former Pacer coach was adamant about not doing) Like how it says Ellis could have a career year, and PG could be even more productive
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Five things to know about the promising, perplexing Indiana Pacers in 2016-17

    I think this was posted within a different thread.

    Comment

    Working...
    X